Summary
In Richardson v. State, 242 Miss. 701, 133 So.2d 266, the court overruled the claim of involuntariness of the confession because of fear generated from his having spent the night before in a cell which had been known as the "death cell" many years before when hanging was the mode of execution.
Summary of this case from Ivey v. StateOpinion
No. 41916.
October 2, 1961.
1. Homicide — murder — evidence — conviction.
Evidence was sufficient to sustain conviction of murder.
2. Criminal law — confessions — confession not involuntary as result of fear.
Confession made by defendant after spending a night in a cell which had been used as death cell some forty years before when execution was by hanging, and in which some of scaffolding was still to be found, was not involuntary on ground it was result of fear generated by spending night in that particular cell.
Headnotes as approved by Gillespie, J.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Warren County; BEN GUIDER, J.
R. Jess Brown, Vicksburg, for appellant.
I. The trial court erred in allowing, over appellant's objection, the alleged confession of the appellant to be placed in evidence, and in denying appellant's motion for a directed verdict. Blackshire v. State, 158 Miss. 364, 130 So. 498; Fisher v. State, 145 Miss. 116, 110 So. 361; Garrard v. State, 50 Miss. 147; Johnson v. State, 107 Miss. 196, 65 So. 218, 51 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1183; Mitchell v. State, 171 Miss. 4, 156 So. 654; Pickens v. State, 129 Miss. 191, 91 So. 906; Reason v. State, 94 Miss. 290, 48 So. 820; White v. State, 129 Miss. 182, 91 So. 903; Whitley v. State, 78 Miss. 255, 28 So. 852, 53 L.R.A. 402.
II. Even if the Court should not agree with appellant's contention that the trial court erred in allowing, over appellant's objection, the alleged confession of the appellant to be placed in evidence, and appellant's motion for a directed verdict, there still remains the fact that the trial court erred in refusing to give the jury appellant's instruction requesting the Court to direct the jury to find appellant "not guilty". Dobbs v. State, 200 Miss. 595, 29 So.2d 84; Gross v. State, 191 Miss. 383, 2 So.2d 818; Herron v. State, 206 Miss. 485, 40 So.2d 256; Hosey v. State, 136 Miss. 5, 100 So. 577; Roney v. State, 167 Miss. 327, 150 So. 774; White v. City of Philadelphia, 197 Miss. 166, 19 So.2d 493.
III. Even if the Court should not agree with appellant's contention that the trial court erred in allowing, over appellant's objection, the alleged confession of the appellant to be placed in evidence, there remains the fact that the Court erred in refusing to give the jury appellant's instruction requesting the Court to direct the jury that it could not find the appellant guilty of a greater crime than manslaughter. Carter v. State, 199 Miss. 871, 25 So.2d 470; Dye v. State, 127 Miss. 492, 90 So. 180; Fletcher v. State, 129 Miss. 207, 91 So. 338; Guest v. State, 96 Miss. 871, 52 So. 211; Springer v. State, 129 Miss. 589, 92 So. 633; Sec. 2226, Code 1942.
IV. Even if the Court should not agree with appellant's contention that the trial court erred in refusing to give the jury appellant's instruction requesting the Court to direct the jury that it could not find the appellant guilty of a greater crime than manslaughter, there remains the fact that the State failed to prove that the appellant was a party to a common design to effect the death of the deceased. Bangren v. State, 196 Miss. 887, 17 So.2d 599; Carter v. State, supra; Dye v. State, supra.
V. The verdict and judgment was contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Clanton v. State (Miss.), 49 So.2d 267; Dawson v. State, 62 Miss. 241; Flemings v. State, 193 Miss. 93, 8 So.2d 457; Garvin v. State, 207 Miss. 751, 43 So.2d 209; Merrell v. State (Miss.), 39 So.2d 306; Pollard v. State, 53 Miss. 410; McElroy's Mississippi Evidence, Sec. 20.
G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
I. As to the guilt of appellant of murder. Rogers v. State, 222 Miss. 609, 76 So.2d 702; Tate v. State, 228 Miss. 89, 87 So.2d 295.
II. As to the cause of death. Chatman v. State, 239 Miss. 844, 125 So.2d 531.
III. As to the admissibility of the confession. Nicholson v. State, 235 Miss. 273, 108 So.2d 842; Pinter v. State, 203 Miss. 344, 34 So.2d 723; 22 C.J.S., Criminal Law, Sec. 826 p. 1448.
Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of the murder of Washington Williams. Two others were jointly indicted and severance was granted appellant. The jury was unable to agree on punishment and appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment.
The six assignments of error raise only two questions: (1) Was the evidence sufficient to sustain the murder conviction, and (2) was appellant's confession admissible?
The killing of Washington Williams occurred at a "joint" where drinking, gambling and dancing was being indulged in by a large number of people. Deceased, with his wife and several others, went to the "joint" to secure pallbearers for a funeral. After this business was attended, deceased went out the door followed by his wife and Lester Gaines. When the latter two reached the door, appellant and Bryant Williams blocked their passage. Gaines asked to be allowed to go out and appellant or Bryant Williams cursed and told Gaines, "If you're bad, come on out." Gaines replied, "I didn't mean any harm, I just say, let me out." At this, either Bryant Williams or appellant drew a knife on Gaines. Someone apparently not connected with appellant hit Gaines from the rear and knocked him down. Deceased came in and lifted Gaines off the floor and Bryant Williams and appellant went out on the porch. Deceased stated to his wife, "Let's go," and they started out the door. Just as deceased stepped out the door, appellant stabbed him in the left side of the neck, severing the jugular vein. A number of others then "ganged" deceased and he received two other superficial stab wounds. Deceased died before reaching the hospital. There were sharp conflicts in the evidence. Appellant took the stand and denied he stabbed deceased, but there was positive testimony to establish the facts as stated. The conflicts were resolved against appellant by the verdict.
The proof is clear to the point that deceased had no weapon in his hand; in fact, he did nothing to provoke an attack. (Hn 1) We find no merit in the contention that the evidence was not sufficient to justify a finding that appellant was guilty of murder.
(Hn 2) The contention that the confession made by appellant was not voluntary is also without merit. Neither the sheriff nor anyone else threatened appellant in any way, nor was any promise made in connection with the confession. The appellant testified that there were no threats or promises. The contention that the confession was not voluntary is based on the fact that the night before it was made, appellant was confined in a cell which had been used as the death cell some forty years ago when execution was by hanging. Some of the scaffolding formerly used in hanging was still in the cell, but what part is not shown. Appellant testified he was scared because he had spent the night in the cell. The proof showed that the cell is frequently used when necessary to separate prisoners. There was no proof that appellant was put in the cell to frighten him. It is inconceivable that appellant made the detailed statement as a result of fear generated by spending the night in that particular cell.
Affirmed.
Lee, P.J., and Kyle, McElroy and Jones, JJ., concur.